Rajiv Kumar vs State Of U.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 1734 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 87
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6050 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Rajiv Kumar
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Vineet Vikram,Mohammad Khalid
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 27.09.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Anti Corruption), Meerut, Court No.2, whereby discharge application filed by the applicant has been rejected in respect of S.S.T.No.01 of 2020 (State vs Montu & Others) under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, 13(1)(b), 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act arising out of Case Crime No.1694 of 2019, Police Station Surajpur, District Allahabad.

2. The petitioner is employed as Platoon Commander. At the relevant time, he was posted in Company Nagar 3, Gautam Buddh Nagar. On 17.07.2019, he gave an application to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Gautam Buddh Nagar alleging that forged muster rolls in respect of giving duties to the Home Guards had been prepared, and on the basis of forged muster rolls government money was being misappropriated. On this complaint, investigation was carried out, and it was found that in 2 months, in 7 police stations of Gautam Budh Nagar on the basis of forged muster rolls regarding Home Guards, an amount of Rs.7,07,500/- from government exchequer was misappropriated.

3. During the course of investigation, it was also found that the petitioner himself had prepared two muster rolls of similar nature in the month of June, 2019 and September, 2019, and those muster rolls were also having forged entries regarding duties of the Home Guards.

4. After investigating the offence, charge-sheet has been filed and cognizance has been taken. The petitioner has filed an application for discharge from the offences. Learned trial court vide impugned judgment and order has rejected the application for just and valid reasons. At the time of framing of charge/discharge, trial court is required to see whether evidence/material collected by the Investigating Agency indicate strong motive of the petitioner for commission of the offence or not.

5. Looking at the investigation, I am of the view that view of the trial court is correct one and does not require any interference. In view thereof, I do not find any substance in the petition which is hereby dismissed.

Order Date :- 17.1.2023

prateek